Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 26

Bi. Nikos }.

Nouitos - AE 264
1
HYPERSONIC FLOW THEORY

1.0 FASTER AND HIGHER

1903: 35 mph @ Sea Level Wright Flyer











1969: 26,591 mph or 36,000 ft/s or M = 36 Apollo lunar capsule



Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
2
NASP and X - 30

Hypersonic Transport
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
S

1.1 Design Considerations

Subsonic Flight

M
!
!1 ( )

Wing !L
Engines !T
Fuselage !"olume

Airplane components can be designed separately, independent of each other.

Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
4

Supersonic Flight

5 ! M
!
!1 ( )

Wing !L
Engines !T
Fuselage !"olume


Airplane components are slightly coupled through area ruling but still easily identifiable
when looking at the airplane; can be designed separately.
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
S

Hypersonic Flight

M
!
! 5 ( )

! Entire undersurface of the vehicle !L (wave rider) + contributes to T (compresses
air before entering Scramjet)
! Wings: only small size is necessary
! Fuel H
2
!much larger volume requirement
! Components that generate L, T, and !olume are closely integrated.


Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
6

2.0 QUALITATIVE ASPECTS OF HYPERSONIC FLOW

Bypeisonic flow:

M
!
! 5
howevei, some of the phenomena may begin to become impoitant

M
!
! 3

Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
7

2.1 Thin Shock Layers
! Shock Layer = between shock wave and body
! For a given flow deflection angle !, as M
!
" # $ %
! Consider M = 36 flow over a wedge with a half angle ! = 15
0
" # = 18
0
! shock
wave sits very close to the body surface ! shock layer is very thin.

Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
8

2.2 Entropy Layer



















Consider a reentry vehicle with a blunt nose:
! In the nose region: shock wave is highly curved.
! s increases across a shock wave.
! The stronger the shock, the larger the !s .
! A streamline passing through the strong, nearly normal portion of the curved shock
near the centerline of the flow will experience a larger !s than a neighboring
streamline, which passes through a weaker portion of the shock away from the
centerline ! strong s gradients exist in the nose region.
! Entropy layer flows downstream, wetting the body for large distances from the nose.
! BL grows inside this entropy layer and is affected by it.
! Entropy layer is a region of strong vorticity.
! Entropy layer and BL interaction is also called vorticity interaction.
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
9
2.3 Viscous Interaction











! High V, hypersonic flow!very large KE
! Viscous dissipation: when flow is slowed by viscous effects inside the BL!lost KE
! e !T
BL
"
! = T ( ) !! "
! Across a BL: p = const. ! " = p / RT #!to pass the same

! mthrough the BL:! ""
! Hypersonic vehicles fly @ high altitudes ! low ! "lowRe ! thick BL
o

! ! M
"
2
/ Re
x















No viscous interaction Viscous interaction
! Thick BL diverts the main flow away from the surface ! makes a body appear
thicker ! causes bow shock wave ! p on the surface is no longer const. and
equal to free stream p.
! Shock layer interacts with BL!shock layer is fully viscous ! shock wave
shape & p-distribution are affected by viscous effects !

Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
1u

Viscous interaction effect: induced p on a sharp cone @
M
!
= 11, Re = 1.88x10
5
per foot

! High surface p increases aerodynamic heating of the surface!
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
11
2.4 High Temperature Effects

! High V, hypersonic flow!very large KE
! Viscous dissipation: when flow is slowed by viscous effects inside the BL or behind a
strong normal shock wave!lost KE! e !T ""!
vibrational E excitation,
dissociation, ionization

! If an ablative heat shield is used !products of ablation are present within BL!
complex hydrocarbon chemical reactions.

! High T chemically reacting flows influence L, D, M and aero heating on
hypersonic vehicles:
o Convective HT
o Radiative HT
o Apollo re-entry: radiative HT > 30% of total heating
o Jupiter space probe: radiative HT > 95% of total heating
! Consider reentry vehicle @ M = 36@altitude = 59km!T
s
/ T
"
= 252.9
@

altitude = 59km : T
!
= 258K "T
s
= 65, 248K ! 6 xT
surface of the sun
!!!
o B0T: aii is no longei a caloiically peifect gas
o ! " 1.4 , in fact ! " const.
o Taking into account a chemically ieacting gas

!T
s
! 11, 000K
stanuaiu SL conuitions (p = 1 atm & T = 288 K): aii = 2u% 02 + 8u% N2
o 02 uissociation:

2, 000 ! T ! 4, 000 O
2
!2O
o N2 uissociation:

4, 000 ! T ! 9, 000 N
2
!2N
o Ionization:

9, 000 ! T N ! N
+
+ e
"
and O!O
+
+ e
"

! Shock layei in the nose iegion of the ieentiy bouy is a paitially ionizeu
plasma consisting of atoms N anu 0, the ions N
+
anu 0
+
anu elections.
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
12
o Fiee elections absoib iauio-fiequency iauiation!!"##$%&!'(&"%)
+,'!-"$( uuiing pait of a ieentiy tiajectoiy
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
1S

3.0 HYPERSONIC SHOCK WAVE RELATIONS

! Oblique shock relations derived in AE164 are exact, hold for all M > 1, assuming
calorically perfect gas.
! In the limit as M
!
becomes very large!hypersonic shock relations.


Exact:
p
2
p
1
= 1+
2!
! +1
M
1
2
sin
2
" #1
( )
as M
1
! ":
p
2
p
1
=
2#
# +1
M
1
2
sin
2
$

Exact:
!
2
!
1
=
" +1 ( ) M
1
2
sin
2
#
" $1 ( ) M
1
2
sin
2
# + 2
as M
1
! ":
#
2
#
1
=
$ +1
$ %1



T
2
T
1
=
p
2
/ p
1
!
2
/ !
1
as M
1
! ":
T
2
T
1
=
2# # $1 ( )
# +1 ( )
2
M
1
2
sin
2
%
Exact:
u
2
V
1
= 1!
2 M
1
2
sin
2
" !1
( )
# +1 ( ) M
1
2
as M
1
! ":
u
2
V
1
= 1#
2sin
2
$
% +1


Exact:
!
2
V
1
= 1"
2 M
1
2
sin
2
# "1
( )
cot #
$ +1 ( ) M
1
2
as M
1
! ":
#
2
V
1
=
sin2$
% +1


NB: p
2
/ p
1
, T
2
/ T
1
!" as M
1
!"
But: !
2
/ !
1
, u
2
/ V
1
,"
2
/ V
1
# finite values as M
1
# $

The hypersonic pressure coefficient can be written as:
C
p
!
p
2
" p
1
q
1
=
2
# M
1
2
p
2
p
1
"1
$
%
&
'
(
)
=
4
# +1
sin
2
* "
1
M
1
2
$
%
&
'
(
)
as M
1
! ": C
p
=
4
# +1
sin
2
$
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
14

! " # " M relation: tan! = 2cot "
M
1
2
sin
2
" #1
M
1
2
$ + cos2" ( ) + 2
%
&
'
(
)
*



Note that in the hypersonic limit when ! is small ! " is also small.
Using small angle approximations:


sin! ! !
cos2! ! 1
tan" ! sin" ! "
so ! =
2
"
M
1
2
"
2
#1
M
1
2
$ +1 ( ) + 2
%
&
'
(
)
*
applying the high M limit:
! =
2
"
M
1
2
"
2
M
1
2
# +1 ( )
$
%
&
'
(
)
*
"
!
=
# +1
2
for ! = 1.4 : " = 1.2#
i.e., in the hypersonic limit for a slender wedge, the wave angle is only 20% larger than
the wedge angle ! thin shock layer.
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
1S

4.0 A LOCAL SURFACE INCLINATION METHOD:
NEWTONIAN THEORY

From linearized theory: C
p
=
2!
M
"
2
#1

The local cp depends only on the local surface inclination angle !

For hypersonic flow: local surface inclination method !

Newtonian Theory:

C
p
= 2sin
2
!

NB: Incompressible flow:
C
p, max
= +1
@ a stagnation point
Hypersonic flow:
C
p, max
= +2
@ a stagnation point













Modified Newtonian Theory

C
p
= C
p, max
sin
2
!
! This eq. is more accurate for pressure calculations around blunt bodies

Another way to arrive @ Newtonian Theory:

Exact oblique shock relation for cp: C
p
=
4
! +1
sin
2
" #
1
M
$
2
%
&
'
(
)
*
M
!
" !: C
p
=
4
# +1
sin
2
$

! "1: C
p
" 2sin
2
#

in the last eq. " is the wave angle, NOT the flow deflection angle.
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
16

Exact oblique shock relation for #:
!
2
!
"
=
# +1 ( ) M
"
2
sin
2
$
# %1 ( ) M
"
2
sin
2
$ + 2

M
1
! ":
#
2
#
"
=
$ +1
$ %1

! "1:
#
2
#
$
" $
if the density behind shock wave gets
!
large
!
mass
considerations dictate that shock wave is coincident w. body surface. This is also
confirmed by:
!
"
#
$ +1
2
, which foi the auuitional limit ! "1 : # = $

C
p
! 2sin
2
" becomes
C
p
= 2sin
2
! , which is the Newtonian theory result.

Newtonian theory for hypersonic flow
! Particles in the free stream impact only the front surface of the body; they cannot curl
around and impact the rear surface of the body $ for that portion of the body in the
shadow of the incident flow, no impact p is felt $ in the shadow region of the body
surface:
p = p
!
"C
p
= 0



Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
17

! Aerodynamic force (N) is normal to the plate [BTW: this result is true for a flat plate
@ ANY speed!]
! From Newtonian Theory:
C
pl
= 2sin
2
!
C
pu
= 0


C
n
=
1
c
C
pl
! C
pu
( )
dx
o
c
"
=
1
c
2sin
2
#
( )
c = 2sin
2
#


C
l
= C
n
cos! = 2sin
2
! cos!
C
d
= C
n
sin! = 2sin
3
!
L
D
= cot!

NB: last eq. is NOT limited to Newtonian Theory; it is a general result for inviscid
supersonic or hypersonic flow over a flat plate.
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
18


!
L / D !
monotonically as
! "
and
L / D!" as # !0
However, this is
misleading:
! When skin friction is added:
D! finite@" = 0 #L / D!0@" = 0

!
L !max @" # 55
0
(54.7 deg to be precise, from Newtonial Theory). This
result is very realistic; the max lift coefficient for many hypersonic vehicles
occurs @ an aoa in this neighborhood.
! Lift curve is nonlinear @ low aoa in contrast to subsonic and supersonic flows
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
19

! Newtonian Theory is more accurate for 3-D bodies.
! Newtonian Theory accuracy improves as M increases.
4.1 Circular Cylinder of infinite span

c
d
=
D
q
!
S
=
" D
q
!
2R ( )
S = 2R b ( )
c
d
=
4
3
from Newtonian theory

NB: this result does NOT depend on Mach; it simply assumes that M is high enough for
the flow to be hypersonic (Mach independence principle).
4.2 Sphere
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
2u
c
d
=
D
q
!
S
S = "R
2
c
d
= 1 from Newtonian theory

NB: this result does NOT depend on Mach; it simply assumes that M is high enough for
the flow to be hypersonic (Mach independence principle).
Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
21

5.0 AERODYNAMIC HEATING

! AH is the dominant design consideration for hypersonic vehicles.
o Blunt LE in hypersonic vehicles to dissipate as much Q as possible.
o AD is of secondary importance
o SS Columbia accident, 01 February 2003: Thermal protection tiles damaged
during launch ! hot gases penetrated surface ! destroyed internal wing
structure!

5.1 The Connection between Hypersonic Flow and AH


C
H
!
! q
w
"
e
u
e
h
aw
# h
w
( )
S tantonnumber
! q
w
: heat flux ! heat transfer rate per unit area @a given point on the body
W / m
2
( )
"
e
: local density@theedgeof the BL
u
e
: local velocity@theedgeof the BL
h
w
: enthalpyof thegas@thewall
h
aw
: adiabaticwall enthalpy = enthalpyof thegas@thewall whenT
w
= T
aw
=
T
w
is sohot $ nomoreEis conducted int othewall fromthegas

Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
22
Example: hypersonic flow over a flat plate @ aoa = 0-deg:

!
e
= !
"
and u
e
= V
"
ignoring viscous interaction effects as described earlier.

For high M laminar flow over the plate: T
aw
! 0.88T
0

i.e., the adiabatic wall T is ~ 12% less than the total T in the free stream.

Make the approximation: T
aw
! T
0
" h
aw
! h
0


where h
0
= h
!
+
V
!
2
2

@ hypersonic speeds: V
!
is very large
@ high altitude: T
!
is very cool !h
"
= c
p
T
"
is relatively small
!high speeds:

h
0
!
V
!
2
2

T
s
(hot by normal standards)

! T
melting
or T
decomposition
of the surface

!! T
0
!h
0
"" h
w
!

h
aw
! h
w
" h
0
! h
w
" h
0
"
V
#
2
2

re-write Stanton number for a flat plate in hypersonic flow:


C
H
=
! q
w
!
"
V
"
h
aw
# h
w
( )
$
! q
w
!
"
V
"
V
"
2
/ 2 ( )
%
! q
w
$
1
2
!
"
V
"
3
C
H

The last eq. shows that AB iate incieases with the cube of the velocity.
AB, on the othei hanu, incieases only with the squaie of the velocity.

5.2 Blunt vs. Slender Bodies in Hypersonic Flow

Consider the total HTR into a hypersonic vehicle per unit time dQ/dt = local HTR
!
over the entire surface area of the vehicle.

!
Stanton number: C
H
!
dQ / dt
"
#
V
#
h
0
$ h
w
( )S


0sing the appioximations in the pievious section we can wiite:

dQ
dt
!
1
2
"
#
V
#
3
SC
H


Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
2S
Theie is an analogy between skin fiiction anu AB calleu Re analogy. Foi a laminai
flow, Re analogy can be expiesseu as:


C
H
c
f
=
1
2
Pr
!2/ 3


wheie c
f
!
"
q
#
and Pr !

#
c
p
k
$
frictional dissipation
thermal conduction


Pi is a gas piopeity (not a flow piopeity)
Foi aii stanuaiu conuitions: Pr
!
= 0.71 up to T
!
" 600K

Foi hypeisonic flow Pi = 1

Wiite Re analogy in teims of the
!
HT and SF coefficients:


C
H
C
f
=
1
2


wheie C
f
!
1
L
c
f
dx
0
L
"
=
D
SF
q
#
S


So, the total BTR into the vehicle can be wiitten as:
dQ
dt
!
1
4
"
#
V
#
3
SC
f

!"#$%&'( Bypeisonic vehicle ie-enteiing oui atmospheie fiom a mission in space.

AB slows the vehicle uown: D = !m
dV
"
dt
#
dV
"
dt
= !
D
m
= !
1
2m
$
"
V
"
2
SC
D


Re-wiite the total BTR as:
dQ
dt
=
dQ
dV
!
dV
!
dt
=
dQ
dV
!
"
1
2m
#
!
V
!
2
SC
D
$
%
&
'
(
)


Equating this to the eailiei expiession foi the total BTR:


dQ
dV
!
"
1
2m
#
!
V
!
2
SC
D
$
%
&
'
(
)
=
1
4
#
!
V
!
3
SC
f
*
dQ
dV
!
= "
1
2
mV
!
C
f
C
D
*
dQ = "
1
2
m
C
f
C
D
dV
!
2
2

Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
24
To get the total Q tiansfeiieu into the vehicle, dQ
!
fiom the beginning of the ie-
entiy wheie Q = u anu V
!
= V
E
to the enu of the entiy wheie Q = Q
tot
and V
!
= 0 :


dQ
0
Q
tot
!
= "
1
2
C
f
C
D
d
m
V
#
2
2
$
%
&
'
(
)
V
E
0
!
*
Q
tot
=
1
2
C
f
C
D
1
2
mV
E
2
$
%
&
'
(
)

! The total Q tiansfeiieu into the vehicle is ~ initial KE
! The total Q tiansfeiieu into the vehicle is ~ iatio of skin fiiction B to total B

D = D
p
+ D
f
oi C
D
= C
D
P
+ C
f


!to minimize total AB, we neeu to minimize the iatio
C
f
C
D
p
+ C
f

Consiuei 2 extieme configuiations:
a. Shaip-noseu slenuei bouy
Laige C
f

Small C
D
p

C
D
! C
f

B is mainly skin fiiction

C
f
C
D
! 1













Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
2S
b. Blunt bouy
Small C
f

Laige C
D
p

C
D
! C
D
p

B is mainly piessuie uiag

C
f
C
D
!!1



! To minimize AB, the vehicle must be a blunt bouy, i.e., have a blunt nose.


5.3 Aerodynamic Heating to a Blunt Body

! H. Julian Harvey Allen (1951): introduced idea that a blunt body would reduce AH
compared to a slender body
! Stagnation point is usually (not always) the point of max HTR to a hypersonic
vehicle.
! LBL near the stagnation point.

From LBL theory:

! q
w
!
1
R

where R is the nose radius @ the stagnation point ! to reduce AH, increase R

Stagnation Point AH for a Cylinder:



! q
w
= 0.57Pr
!0.6
"
e

e
( )
1/ 2 du
e
dx
h
aw
! h
w
( )


Stagnation Point AH for a Sphere:



! q
w
= 0.763Pr
!0.65
"
e

e
( )
1/ 2 du
e
dx
h
aw
! h
w
( )

Comparing the 2 eqs: they are the same except for the leading term !Stagnation Point
AH to a Sphere

! Stagnation Point AH to a Cylinder (WHY?)

Bi. Nikos }. Nouitos - AE 264
26
A simpler engineering formula for AH by Tauber & Meneses:

! q
w
= !
"
N
V
"
M
C

For the stagnation point: M = 3, N = 0.5, C = 1.83x10
!8
R
!1/ 2
1!
h
w
h
0
"
#
$
%
&
'

Units:

! q
w W / cm
2
( ), V
!
m / s
( ), "
!
kg / m
3
( ), R
m
( )

So, for the stagnation point we have:

! q
w
= !
"
0.5
V
"
3
1.83x10
#8
R
#1/ 2
( )
1#
h
w
h
0
$
%
&
'
(
)

Again, we see that:
! AH ~ cube of the velocity
! Stagnation point AH ~ 1 / R
! Stagnation point AH ~ !
"


The last result appears to be inconsistent with:

! q
w
=
1
2
!
"
V
"
3
C
H

which shows that Stagnation point AH ~ !
"

However

C
H
!
1
Re
!
1
"
#
$ ! q
w
! "
#
C
H
! "
#